Skip to main content
11:00 pm
is already taking holding with the insurance companies must be fleeing the medicare advantage program. people must be virtually dropping in the street in las vegas and everywhere else. all right. i mean, it's not like the thing already happened. it's happened already. and he's saying be very afraid. here's what really happened. here's what really happened since they put it in. more insurance companies than ever have asked to provide medicare advantages to seniors. they think they're getting plenty of profit out of the program. [applause] one. two, there are 17% more seniors in this program than governor romney claims to be bailing out than there were last year and three, the cost of being in it for the seniors has dropped 16% because of the savings that have been enact the and because people are being competed for.
11:01 pm
not only has no disaster occurred, medicare is stronger because of the changes that the president has made. these are taxed on the democrats. chawlz -- [cheering and applause] now, what else are they going to do? harry reid said that, they want to repeal governor romney does the student loan reforms. so if they got a lot in common with medicare. here's what happens, president obama and the congress in 2009 adopted a long-term change in the way students borrowed money to go to college. and it used to be for years and years that the government gave money to the banks in the form of guarantees, we would guarantee 90% of the bank loan
11:02 pm
that the banks made to the students. set ago is side the reserve in case the money didn't get repaid. it turned out the price of the loans went down and the default rate went down once you made the rates down, people could afford to pay it. we started letting the students to pay it at fixed percentage of north carolina. nobody had to drop out of school because they borrowed money. [cheering and applause] what the president did because he knew we needed more people to get college degrees the cost of college was killing people. we dropped from zenned in the world to 16th. the percentage of the people graduated from college until we are almost first in a percentage that go. it's because the cost and people thinking that can never pay it
11:03 pm
back. it's a big deal. what happened when president obama and the congress adopted the so-called direct student loan program and allowed students to pay that money back at the fixed percent of their income for twenty years. nobody has to drop out again. and when you get out, you don't have to take a job because of the lobe burden. your loan payment will be determined by the salary. not the other way around. it's a huge dap. okay so ab and we're starting. we already have a million young americans in this program already. and we're moving to e get everybody in there. okay. that's saved you as the taxpayer $60 billion over ten years. it was actually cheaper because when kids can repay their loans, they do it. -- [applause] with the savings the congress and the president increased the pell grant over the next ten years and increased the tax credits to middle class families to help more people pay for
11:04 pm
college. what is going happen really according their own math if the republicans win, is thing they're going repeal this, raised cost of student loans, make them harder to pay, increase the dropout rates, reduce the pell grants and not fund the tax credit. that's the math. i will stand with barack obama and shelly berkeley and john degioia, i want to do. it [cheering and applause] [cheering and applause] [cheering and applause] i like this program. [cheering and applause] i will -- look, i didn't make this up. [laughter] i'm explaining stuff i understand now. so just one other thing.
11:05 pm
[inaudible] to the nevada and california line of the antisolar park. the biggest one in america. if you haven't seen it, you thought go sometime. three big towers 450 feet high. all these panels circle them. 2,000 american working people there. [cheering and applause] 2,000. [cheering and applause] a lot of women in construction jobs. [cheering and applause] the european, african-american, asian, latino, everybody near as i could tell, the only thing they had in common the wide array of extremely impressive tattoos. these people get what they're doing. they know they're making america energy dependent. they are -- fighting global
11:06 pm
warming. they are liberating you from the independence and nevada and california and eventually all america can be self-sufficient and environmentally responsible and create more jobs. and -- [cheering and applause] the president opened new federal land for responsible gas and oil development. he's not against that. he wants us to do all the above. how can we not go after solar and wind power when every ncial study said -- in the capacity to generate electricity from the sun and wind. how can we turn away from the fact germany on a country -- in london -- on a sunny day last spring generated the equivalent of 20 nuclear power plants worth
11:07 pm
of electricity from the sun alone. [cheering and applause] why in the world would we walk away from that future? the answer is follow the money. follow the money. we'll generate more jobs, we'll safe the planet for our children and grandchildren. we'll be leading the world in the new technology of the future and create the middle class jobs you want if we do that. the president negotiated a deal where the auto company management, the union, and the environmental groups to double car mileage over the next few years. everybody was for it. everybody. [applause] and in a cut your fuel bill in half and create the dependent on the estimates anywhere between 2 and 500,000 high-tech jobs. doing all this work to get
11:08 pm
double car mileage. who can be against that? his opponent governor romney is against that. he's against the regulation doubling car mileage that management, labor, and the environmental groups are all for. why? he says your cars will cost more. well, they will cost a little more in the beginning, but all the studies show that over the life of the car, you net thousand of dollars in savings once we cut the gas bill in half. [applause] truth is, there are some people who don't want you to get your gas usage in half. [laughter] follow the money. look, you get the picture. the choice is between we're all in this together and you're on your own. between a country where the government and the private sector working in partnership to
11:09 pm
create a new american economy, or one where advertisers work to keep your torn up and upset all the time to convince you the government is the source of all evil and mess up a two-car parade. the choice is believing that we are better off when we work for shared prosperity because too much inequality is a severe con strainlt on economic growth for everybody else. so should we work for shared prosperity or trickled down economics? this is the clear choice. it's a clear choice between president obama and governor romney. between shelly berkeley and her opponent. defeat steven, jon, and their opponents. they're not bad people and i'm
11:10 pm
new york city not trying to get you -- i'm not trying to get you torn up and upset. i'm telling you the truth. this is what is going to happen. if you really -- if you want north korea come back, quicker, stronger, broader, deeper, more modern, more relevant to the future, if you want to rebuild the 21st century american middle class and just as important give poor people a ladder in to it, you have to make the right choice. [applause] at nevada, look at the crowd you are the picture of america's future. go out there and claim it on election day. god bless you. [cheering and applause] [cheering and applause] ♪ ♪ ♪
11:11 pm
♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ presidential debate thursday night live on c-span c-span radio and online at watch and engage. coming up next, here on c-span2, a discussion on women's health care in contraceptive services. then the vice president of spain's largest bank talks about the european debt crisis. that's followed bay discussion on the foreign policy plan laid out by republican presidential nominee mitt romney. >> look at c-span radio at the 15th anniversary amber tweets happy birthday. i have been listening to on the
11:12 pm
morning commute for years. here to tell us more about the c-span radio is nancy. he's been there since the beginning. tell us about the programming that people can hear on c spainc radio. >> well, as you mentioned, washington journal ever morning beginning at 7:00 a.m. eastern time three hours of interviews, news updates, and your phone calls, e-mails, and tweets. and then after washingtons, and journal we cover a variety of the events from capitol hill to public policy events takes place around the city.cover a today, for example, senatoric chuck schumer, a new york democrat will be speaking talking about the presidential election and tax reform. we'll have it live for you on c-span radio.el antid spean -- speaking of thesn presidential election we cover the debate, the next debate, this thursday night with the viceat presidential candidates d vice president biden in ourcand preview program beginsed at 7:00. the programs will be airing on : ouran television and c-span radio. and we have some special
11:13 pm
programming every day weekdays from 5:00 to 7:00 p.m. eastern day.s washington today is the every day, washington today is news call and we catch up on the latest news, that's monday through friday. supreme court oral arguments on c-span radio. anis week affirmative affirmative-action, s place tomorrow. the court releases oral arguments once a week. you can hear this affirmative- action case on c-span radio at 4:00 on friday. saturday night, american history, followed by overnight programming of "book tv." and then we replay meet the press as well as some other talk shows from sunday. that is just some of what airs on c-span radio. host: it aris in washington --
11:14 pm
airs in washington. where else can people listen if they don't live in washington? >> is available on a number of platforms. yuka listen to us on xm satellite radio, channel 119. and if you have a smartphone, you can find our apps. and you can dial in and listen to our station on the phone and online at in the d.c. area, on 90.1 fm. and we are on hd radio 1. when the house and senate are in session, you can hear the house live on hd 2 o and 2 on hd 3.
11:15 pm
host: thank you so tomorrow morning's washington journal, a look at the upcoming presidential debates. our guest is frank don tellly. -- for office. and look at medicare's growing cost with emily the health care reporter from "congressional quarterly." washington journal is live every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span. the house oversight and government affairs committee hold a hearing wednesday to exam the attack on the u.s. consulate in benghazi, libya. we'll be live from capitol hill
11:16 pm
starting at noon eastern on c-span. this month at presidential candidates meet for debate we're asking middle and high school students to send a message to the president as part of the student cam video documentary competition. they will answer the question, what is the most important issue the president should consider in 2013? for a chance to win the grand prize of $5,000 and $50,000 in total prizes available. it is open to students grade sixth through twelfth for complete details and rules go online to [applause] a discussion on women's health care and contraception services. georgetown university grad was among the group of panelists to talk about women health care seability and the government's role in the funding reproductive service the. this is hosted by southern med dis university in dallas.
11:17 pm
it's ninety minutes. let me start first can charles curran. he's a professor at sm. he served as president for three national professional societies, the american theological society, the catholic though lodge call society of america and the society of christian ethics. he's won numerous awards and edited tons of books. he's named "new york times" man of the news and abc person of the week. next i would like to introduce linda eads serves as directer of the hunt leadership scholars program. she taught at the school of law since january 1986. she teaches and writes in the area of evidence, constitution law, and women in the law.
11:18 pm
professor has been named to the mesh law institute and recognized one of the texas top women lawyers. and i also would like to introduce ken lambrecht president and chief executive off of planted parenthood. they are the largest reproductive health care provider in the state and one of the largest in the nation. it's networking of health certainlies merge this fall and they now serve central and north texas including austin, dallas, forth worth, tyler, and waco. planted parenthood have -- each year. planned parenthood in 2005 and brings more than twenty years of leadership experience in the health care industry. finally that brings us our keynote speaker tonight. most of us remember the moment that sandra she testified about
11:19 pm
seven months ago on the importance of requiring insurance plans to cover con stray seption. the remarks through the radio talk show host rush limbaugh who called her names. but maybe that isn't -- what isn't well known is that mrs. fluke devoted her career to public interest advocacy. before attending georgetown she created and lead a new york city program that helped bring quality service to domestic violence and human traffics. she cofounded a new york statewide coalition successfully lobbied for legislation gay teens and other victims of violence access to civil orders of protection. she graduated from georgetown school of law. she spends her time speaking out on issues concerning women on health care access. her appearance including speaking at the recent
11:20 pm
democratic national convention. let's welcome her to smu what i'm sure will be a lively discussion. [applause] [applause] [applause] thank you. thank you very much. and i i want to extend my thanks to beth for putting together a lot of the evening. it's sure to be a fascinating discussion for myself including and thank you very much for the kind introduction, karen. now i like to make sure that when i speak before an audience nobody comes away disappointed. i like to begin with the caf yet. if you come here to see how slutty i am in person, you are probably going to be disappointed with the content of my discussion.
11:21 pm
[applause] [applause] i hope that you will be disappointed with the content of my discussion. if you come away feeling that was confirmed, i will have very much failed in my talk this evening. so lively indeed. so i thought i would begin by just laying out a few facts. part of what we're examining this evening is the discussion how media covered this policy and some of the women's health pols that's been discovered and discussed earlier this year. and unfortunately, i think that coverage has been lacking in factual content. and in some cases has included some very interand specific dis, distortions of those facts not only regarding my personal life but regarding the actual policy under debate. i would like to begin by clearing up a few misconceptions. and i'm usually ask the audience
11:22 pm
to tell me what they think on the questions. you're getting off easy because it's a bigger room. you won't be quizzed. so first i'd like to just start with what i actually testified to. i did not testify about my own sex life. i didn't actually testify about anyone's sex life. i did not talk about my own inability to afford contraception. i did not say that i needed a system for affording it from taxpayers. it's been completely distorted, unfortunately. what i testified about was the need for women on my campus, who did have trouble affording contraception, and the women who needed contraception for important health needs other than preventing unintended pregnancy. specifically i talked about a close friend of mine who had the doctor prescribed her contraception to prevent cysts from growing on the over i are.
11:23 pm
i talked about consequences when she was denied the coverage on the own private insurance that he was paying for. and after a few months, she was unable to afford to cover that on her own. and so she had to have an over i are surgically removed and has dire consequences for her ability to have children in the future. so that's what i actually testified about. and unfortunately that has been very much lost in the public conversation that has ensued. one of the biggest myths is the it was a policy that was about government funded of contraception or entitlement to government funding for health care. we were actually discussing private insurance women pay for on their own with the own deductible. at georgetown, specifically student insurance is covered entirely by students. actually no constitutional money, no money from the university involved at all.
11:24 pm
another misconception it was about forcing churches to pay for contraception against their belief. churches and houses ofship are completely complemented. doesn't affly them and never did. the conversation has more been a debate is around religious affiliated university and non-profit. we come, to scare, what i think is a rather brilliant policy. the women who are attending those schools were working at the non-profits are able to have their own premium dollars go toward the contraception they are choosing to use individually and the doctors are prescribing for them. but that the university or the institution's money is not going toward that service if they have on sections to. to me, it seems like a brilliant position to land on that meets the concernings of those
11:25 pm
involved. another misconception has been, you know, whether this was about criminalizing contraception or not. and this particular policy is actually not about criminalizing contraception but i do think it's important realize right now in 2012, there are those being introduced in state legislatures across the country, and in congress that would have that affect so call persons of initiative would criminalize certain types of contraception as well as certain acts of inhave a throw vertlyizations. -- they use in order to conceive a child. there are also proposals that would have allowed employers to determine whether or not to cover emergency contraception, regard -- not just emergency all contraception regardless whether or not they were the religious institution. if you worked for a fast food
11:26 pm
joint and your employer didn't believe in contraception, they could remove that from insurance. it wasn't just about contraception. it was any medical service that the employer didn't believe in for my reason. that's something like chemotherapy could be denied. if the employer didn't believe in it. and that's such a incredible personal choice to turn over to one's employer. it's pretty stunning that is where the debate is right now. another big point of debate has been about a afford ability of contraception and whether or not it was widely affordable and it was to do about nothing. sometimes you listen to some comment at a timers it sounds like it's given out on the street corner and anyone can ahold of it. and what is anyone concerned about. again, let's look at actual facts.
11:27 pm
heart research associates found that for women ages 18 to 34 many of the women who are using birth control 55% of them have had trouble affording contraception at some point. i realize right now we're on a college campus, so many of you are able to access it at really affordable prices. that's actually because college campuses have subsidized access to contraception, it can be much more expensive on the private market if you don't have insurance coverage. the center for american progress found that some forms of contraception can cost as much as $the 60 per year. when you add the doctor appointment required to get the prescription it can take it up to $1,000 a year. that's not affordable for all women. that's quite a bit for someone 0 a student budget, perhaps or someone who is in a low-income family. and that's why we found that 29%
11:28 pm
of women in the country had used their contraception inconsistently in order to try to save money. if you know anything about contraception, you know that inconsistent use is a really bad idea. [laughter] so that's not where we want women to be turning. that's not a choice we want them to be making. so having said all of that, there's been so much emphasis put on whether or not this was government money. and i do think it's important to know that this policy was not about government funding of contraception. what if it had been? i personally think that's a good public policy. we have that as good public policy. we have title x on the federal level which provides government funding for reproductive health service for contraception for the poorest women in our community. the women i described in the statistics who had trouble affording contraception.
11:29 pm
and that program is under attack right now in texas, which i know is going to be discussed a little bit later. but also in congress there have been bills to completely eliminate title x and defund those services. that's incredibly hypocritical when we have the exact same legislators who are saying to women, you don't need this affordable care act policy that requires your private insurance to cover contraception. if you have trouble affording it, you can go to the clinic down the street and then turn around and defund the programs that make sure that it is affordable at the clinic. that's leaving women nowhere to turn. but that's where we're right now. that's the conversation that we're in. but even if you don't believe that women should that assistance in affording contraception and you would rather look tat from at purely
11:30 pm
-- or a purely self-serving point of view, every dollar that we invest in access to contraception yields $4 in spending that we don't have to spend on unintended pregnancies and the associated services. ..
11:31 pm
even if you're not a poster, it's a smart way to not face but so many of them is a difficult moments and difficult decision. but let's think about the consequences for those individual women of unintended pregnant fees. i think speaking to a room with many students and that highlights this. imagine for a moment that you timed out tomorrow that you are at or that your girlfriend or your partner is pregnant, or for the slightly older folks in the audience come your daughter was a student is pregnant and think about the ways in which that changes the options she may have for completing her education or four for filling her dreams in her career. i want to acknowledge there and many women and many families who do continue to strive and to accomplish those things and you love children who are not planned very much and i applaud those families, but it can be a difficult circumstance and it
11:32 pm
can be a barrier for many women. and that really robs all of us have the potential that those women have to contribute amazing accomplishments and amazing ideas for public discourse that were not able to hear from them because of these types of barriers. we have seen that historically over the last two decades, i mean open wide access to contraception is something i made an incredible difference to being able to have careers, being able to hold elected office, being able to be part of our larger public discourse and the ceos and contribute to our society and that way. so it is important that we make that option available to all the women in our communities. we know that women who have trouble affording contraception are disproportionately from low income communities. this is common sense and they are also more likely to be women of color.
11:33 pm
so when we don't make sure the contraception is affordable, we are denying ourselves their potential, but we are denying ourselves hearing the perspective of very specific communities, communities that i hope will be increasingly included in our public dialogue and that all of us need to be able to hear from them to have that rich and full conversation as a society. because that is what it ultimately comes down to is the quality, not just equality on paper i'm saying that contraception is not a legal or quality on paper saying you can be admitted to university or you can hold a job, they make in data quality into reality. making sure that even if his legal, it's affordable and making sure that even if you have the option to pursue that career, you have the ability to control your own reproduction so
11:34 pm
that career is a realistic goal and something that can be achieved and not derailed and that the rest of us can benefit from those contribution. so with that, i am looking forward to hearing from the other panelists. hot mark [applause] >> thank you. we are going to hear from each individual panels and will start first with charlie. i'm sorry, with training greek. >> we'd made this decision earlier. >> she works for the pro-spirit >> charlie is always asking me for money and i'm never giving it to him. well, they want me to start
11:35 pm
first because i'm going to talk about the lie and bore you for five minutes. but they only gave me five minutes because of that. but there are two ideas they really want to put forward here and in some ways, i think i am going to go to a point further than sandra good. i want to talk about both the constitutional issue of privacy and then i want to talk about how the constitution resolves the struggle between freedom of religion in the right of government to regulate society, even when such regulations may interfere with religious doctrine because i think those are two points that are important here. there was a time in this country before 1965, when it was okay for a state to outlaw contraception spanner couples. several states had them for years. they were on the books lingering on the books for years and finally the supreme court in a
11:36 pm
case called griswold versus connecticut says it is unconstitutional to prohibit married people from using contraception in the privacy of their bedroom. does the constitution have a provision that says government shall not prohibit married people from using contraception in their bedroom? no, it does not. it does have something called due process and within due process accords eventually found there was a right of privacy. and for my libertarian friends in the crowd, a name something you've been seeing for years, which is the government needs to get out of our life to the extent possible and we don't want the government to regulate what we do with our marital sexuality. so griswold sets a marker that down the court used, for example, to say the government can't regulate in addition to mary contraception. but beyond this idea is the idea
11:37 pm
that government cannot control all procreation. is there anything more and not meant to have the government how politicians control procreation? i know that many of us have heard about stories in china with one child will spirit you can only have one child and abortions when they find out the child is a female. so government regulation of ideas decide to do with their bodies in terms of procreation is a dangerous concept which the supreme court has recognized. we just came back from the legal analysis and about why did the supreme court did not? why did it decide that within the i.d. of the constitution the spread of liberty? and the reason is its core value, while we were founded, which is we want to protect rights to the extent we can. in a system of government and rolls its hard to do that, but we have to have limits. and the court decided that those
11:38 pm
limits existed in the area of procreation. those core values of liberty and allowing us to fulfill our goal as human beings in terms of having a family or not having a family are a score to this country as concepts of religious freedom. and i believe those are core i'll so. so i cannot fear to have this argument posed as we as a country cannot step on religious freedom by allowing people access to the right to control their procreation. these are core equal values in what has been done is the argument has made over and over again that it has to do with religious freedom. no one wants to tread on that ground i certainly don't. i want all of us to believe in the things we want to believe and i don't want government regulating that either. but it's not just about religious freedom. it's also about human freedom
11:39 pm
and human dignity. now, the other point to make here is that when the court talks about procreation and procreative freedom and about a woman's right to control her body, it talked in hugely spiritual terms. and it is interesting that it did. the last important abortion, kc, this is that the court said about a woman's right to choose an abundance right to procreate. the liberty of the woman is at stake in a sense unique to the human condition is so unique to the lot the mother who carries the shed to falter in the subject to anxieties, physical constraints, pain that only she must bear. her suffering is too intimate and personal for the state to insist without more upon its own vision of a woman's role. the destiny of the women must be shaped to a large extent on her
11:40 pm
conception of her spiritual imperative and her places in society. so it is a statement about what the court used is how we should view of women's decision-making process. and to the extent president obama has engaged in a compromise on this issue, then i would challenge him perhaps an equal protection grounds, although i'd have to extend president, for those lawyers out there, i know, not exactly on point and undue process greens. and i know all the other due process cases were about forgetting it. but there is a core there that recognizes liberty. and the last point i want to make is what we want to do when it person has religious disagreement with government activity? and what i'm going to say here is that although his private insurance, the affordable care act, obamacare does require
11:41 pm
employers to have this insurance. so in some ways it is government although the government is not funding it, we are an insurance company site. there is a system created by the government. so can the government to this? cannot tread on our religious liberty? the last important case in this area was division versus net than it deals with peyote. there is a native american group and the state of washington who smokes peyote as a part of their religious ritual and honest to god sincere belief, not to get high on saturday night. and the court was asked whether or not a person who didn't smoke the peyote who couldn't get a job is being discriminated against and the government is interfering with freedom of religion. the supreme court's another government did not. the author of that opinion was antonin scalia. and scully has had that the free
11:42 pm
exercise clause will have the right to exercise their religious belief, cannot be used to challenge a law of general applicability. so if a life pass without regard to anybody's religion, but happens to affect a religion, which we didn't anticipate, it is not unconstitutional. to even continue further, there is a famous case involving the amish. they say we take care of our old. we don't need any government help. the court said too bad. government has a right to pass this legislation and has the right to ask you to follow it. and then bob jones university want a tax exempt status of the university and was denied by the irs because bob jones university would not allow african-americans into its campus or to african-americans to change that and then wouldn't let them date anybody but
11:43 pm
african-americans. and they said that is our religious beliefs and we should not be denied tax exemption because of a religious belief. the government should not be allowed to have that power over us in the supreme court's that, too bad, you lose. the government can deny you tax exempt status. even though it does involve your religious belief because there's some role for civil society and secular society we are founded on the principle that we get to have an organized non-chaotic government, even if it does infringe on religious belief as long as we are not targeting a religion. so saying all that, i think a lot of what is going on with this birth control argument and with the compromise that the churches are wanting from the government has constitutional implications. i look back on my alternative charlie who knows about religion much more than i do.
11:44 pm
[applause] >> i don't know a darn thing about fall. so i am addressing this issue of women's economic strides from the perspective of the right to have health care coverage in light of the demand of religious liberty. for some of the things we have talked about. in my judgment come religious liberty has been understood and as pointed out is an important if not the primary human right, but it can conflict with other rights. so therefore, i also distinguish between religious liberty and the strict and core sense what religion said in own adherents should do. and here, i believe there are few restrictions that can be
11:45 pm
placed on religious liberty. if you religion calls for you to crack this sacrifice, i think someone has the right to call the cops. and here i may disagree with linda. i think the state should not interfere in any way to prevent native americans from using peyote and a ritual. and even though the court, antonin scalia, that is a date, agreed with that come a few years later the united states passed the reformation act 97 to to two opposed that decision. >> i just want to adhere the justice khalil once compared me to robespierre. [laughter] >> are you bragging are complaining? dana and i are old friends.
11:46 pm
there is religious freedom restoration act was sponsored by two people, the most conservative, ted kennedy of massachusetts and orrin hatch of utah. anyway, so also i have been very upset that some people, even in this country, but even in germany of putting restrictions on the revision that practice female circumcision. i just think that's atrocious. but there is a more extended concept of religious liberty, refers not to crack as for his own adherents, but to church or religious organization that have employees that do not belong to their religion. i will speak here from the roman catholic perspective and address
11:47 pm
this question with regard to catholic institutions such as hospitals, colleges come in terms of providing contraceptive health care, contraceptive health care insurance for its employees. this obviously has come to the floor and might of the reaction in the u.s. cat at bishops to the obama administration roles and the affordable health care act for contraceptive coverage in such cases. parenthetically, this is the elephant in the room. most catholics disagree with teaching contraception. >> i'm one of the cat. [laughter] >> in this case, the institution i believe still has religious freedom, but other parties are involved in the have their freedoms, to comment their religious freedom. in addition, catholic institutions receive government
11:48 pm
funding for their operations. so you have here the attention of these two different conflicting rights going on here. the rules proposed by the obama administration first of these churches to show them how to provide contraceptive health care insurance for their employees. not only the u.s. catholic bishops, but many other proponents of religious liberty oppose the obama administration regulations. through his great credit, the obama administration had proposed a compromise that such employees would be covered for contraception, but the institution would not have to pay for it. now, ms. luke called that a brilliant solution as i recall and in many ways, i think of ways. here's a conflict situation. how can you solve it to keep everybody happy? now no compromise is perfect
11:49 pm
definition, but nonetheless it seems to me this is an ideal way to handle the situation. unfortunately, the united states bishops failed to go along with it and opposed it in the name of religious freedom good and as they say, i think they've forgotten that freedom and the rights of other people. so i think the compromise is an ideal way to solve these issues. it has been done in the past. it is not always been done. and let's face it, the whole political spectrum today, from left and right, it's unwilling to compromise. so it's always going to be hard to work it out. then he gave a fascinating analogous case that arose in san francisco in 1966, when the city of san francisco said it would not fund social service agencies, including catholic charities that do not provide health care benefits to domestic
11:50 pm
partners. the catholic archbishop of san francisco, william would say that, no liberal he. he wound up in a congregation for the type and. willie brown came to a compromise to allow insured employees to designate anyone illegally domicile in a resonant as a health care co-beneficiary. be that person a child, a parent, aunt, close friend or a and partner. the archbishopric of the catholic church was always in favor of increasing health care insurance coverage and this was the way to do it, even though it be this other factor involved. in my judgment, the second set of rows from the obama administration proposes compromise, which in its always tries to inspect the freedom and rights of all the parties
11:51 pm
involved. [applause] >> thank you and good evening. i am here representing more than 120,000 women who live paycheck to paycheck on his struggle to get by in the side of chafic with the check engine light on them which added hobe take added obj garibay nabors randomly couldn't be here tonight sitting in front of you. one of five women in the united states has been to planned parenthood is sometime in your life. 95% of our services are birth control provision. transmitted infection, breast cancer and cervical cancer screenings from dallas to four words and waco. all the way down to the state capitol in austin. our average client is 20 to 35
11:52 pm
years old, employed andorran school, like many of you, but has little or no health insurance. planned parenthood is often the only health care provider and a medical home. to keep the women in the room, i have a story to share. diane is a registered nurse and how to leverage her job to care for her sick mother. she felt a lump in her breast and didn't have insurance. she said planned parent has helped me when i couldn't get it anywhere else. no one else would help me. they sent me for a, a sonogram, biopsy and the surgeon said i needed to start chemotherapy immediately. that is in stage three breast cancer. and now cancer free and anticipating going back to her heart time soon. i don't know where i would be without planned parenthood. in 2011, our state legislature cut access to health exams, pap
11:53 pm
smears by more than two thirds through the strip $73 million from $111 million budget. they also implemented a priority system, specifically dominating planned parenthood is a provider. because of this, 60 health centers closed across the state, of which only 12 or planned parenthood. none of them provide a safe legal abortion care. all of them were exclusively preventive health care. here in north texas because bystanders and bradley sleep at night is known in the site centers, we diagnose women's seven positive cancers last year, including individuals like diane. many communities like waco, we are the only provider of women's health program services. there are very few other providers they see fewer than five patients when we see more than 2000. an estimated 162,000 women a
11:54 pm
carefully scary because the casa title x funding in texas. the cut is also 75 million will cost or save more than 231 million unnecessary health care costs. an essay for 56% of the birth are paid for by taxpayers to the tune of $2.7 billion. the women's health program is also under attack. texas enacted new regulations that would not allow affiliates of abortion providers organizations who promote abortion to participate in women's health program paid the federal government notified texas that this was not within the guidelines of the federal funding and they would remove the 90% match and i was correct, 90%. the women's health program saved more than $40 million a year in taxes. the department of state health services estimates that it costs $240 to ensure that one gets an
11:55 pm
annual exam and birth control and more than $16,000 for a woman to have medicaid prenatal class in the first year of an infant care. if this speculation stands, more than 130,000 women will be affected and possibly go without health care. planned parenthood in texas serves women's health programs, yet account for 2% of the providers. our governor has made it a point to write an op-ed said planned parenthood is 2% of the providers. they include laboratories. they include doctors offices 55 patients. the reality is that planned parenthood serves more than 50,000 women's health program clients. to me how centers to provide much-needed care provide 10,000 haitians, but to offset planned parenthood as a provider, would expand community health centers by nearly fivefold, which is nearly impossible to do overnight.
11:56 pm
why are we still standing strong? whether one quarter of women in texas are uninsured. texas is one of the highest rates of cervical cancer in the country. as i said before, 56% of births are paid for by taxpayers and we believe that investing in birth control is not only fiscally responsible, but helps create safe and healthy families. every 1 dollar paid in contraceptive services presents $4 in and in unnecessary cost the standard pointed out. texas politicians are spending more money to see fewer women and it is abhorrent. the state of texas has turned his back on women and on basic event of women's health care. to add, i would love to share another story. a patient of ours, lisa is in her 40s, have excellent health insurance for most of her life. when she divorced two years ago, that changed. she no longer have health insurance. and her words, planned parenthood made it possible,
11:57 pm
realistic and affordable to maintain the health and wellness. they got for planned parenthood. [applause] >> thank you. i wanted to ask a few questions and have a brief discussion and i'm all about the questions to you guys in the audience. i seems to me that this kind of oils down to a few key questions in a way. and that is, what role should federal, state and local government plan these issues, particularly family planning. you guys attached on now. how much control should government have? what should i pay for and where should it stop? >> that's a big question. [laughter] does anyone want to begin? [laughter]
11:58 pm
>> now, when i take white house -- [laughter] [applause] i think that we should look at in terms of where the government begins and ends. i think that we are saddled with an insurance system in this country because of what happened after world war ii, an insurance system to provide health care. other countries don't have that to the extent we do. even countries that do allow it. so we have this insurance system that let the government reasonable job is, to make sure that the insurance system allows enough access so that people can be covered within a reasonable premium amount. and that is done simply by watchdog and certain regulations. now, the truth is whenever you have the government involved,
11:59 pm
you have a question of whether they are doing it as cheaply as possible. but that is why we are still using the insurance system because hopefully now, insurance companies -- how many of you got refined? all these years they've been overcharging for administrative costs. and so, insurance companies now will regulate the reasonable amount of money to charge a provider. there's going to be problems. there's always problems. as i tell my students come in this country is a work in progress. sometimes the government will go too far. ways to rein them in. i'm not in favor of excessive government involvement in my life. and sometimes private industry will go too far in terms of wanting how much profit film a couple random and because health care is not sent any guided solely by the bottom line. so i think the government has a role and we have to keep a watch dog cities in how much of
12:00 am
aerobic event. >> i would add to that, that birth control access should be a nonpartisan issue. president nixon signed title x family planning funding into law. it was a republican value for a lesser government intrusion in good fiscal conservatism. one dollar best essays were dollars in unnecessary cost. as we know it today, social ideology is forcing some of our politicians to be more socially conservative and fiscally responsible because they recognize it as just good public health. >> okay. i think coming out -- i'm sorry, go ahead. >> i get a little nervous about some of these responses frankly. this again is a tension between the government and the individual. in certain areas, and i can agree with everything, but i am
12:01 am
in the government at times has to force employers to pay a living wage. the government has to force big companies not to pollute. the government has a lot of games that the government has to do. so that began with this kind of tension, you say i can agree on these issues, but be very careful. and worry might disagree is i think the best solution in the united states for health care is a single-payer system. [cheers and applause] >> i've always said to my opponents, i've never heard anyone want to get out of they get government off my back. [applause] >> it does bring us to a really
12:02 am
interesting point that many of the lawsuits have been filed around this regulation have argued thing site rather than regulating private insurance, government should provide contraception directly through taxpayer funding, which is in some respects a less conservative position than the one we were at and hit the lawsuits are filed by a conservative organization. but i wanted to clarify one thing, which i think speaks to a charlie was just saying when we discussed earlier the restoration act publishes a piece of legislation that addressed the supreme court case that we discussed. if there is a compelling enough interest, it is appropriate for the government to regulate in that way. so the question comes to put their frankly the argument that i made or that can made as a compelling enough interest. and if it is, then this is a regulation that stands. we don't want anyone to go away thinking the regulation is unconstitutional are a violation
12:03 am
of a federal statute. not. >> there are some cases that have not yet been decided, but i feel they are going to turn out in the way that i discussed. >> probably. >> we talked about where there is room for compromise on some of these issues, but what types of things to think are negotiable? where can we reach sort of a happy medium in some of these issues? >> well, i can't speak to either extreme of either wing of ideology, but i think most americans do not want government involved in our decisions, family decisions. i think that whether they want to pay taxpayer dollars for my
12:04 am
birth control, there'd be a disagreement about that. although many people would be fine with that given the cost of not having birth control. in terms of having the government tell us whether they can use contraception, whether or not these user and premium to pay for contraception, most americans will agree with that. in fact, when you ask most americans whether they are in favor of having planned parenthood kinds of facilities available, the majority say yes. this is something sanders said about the media not being very careful. it is so easy to write a media story about whether or not you want your hard-earned dollars to go for contraception. but most americans come when they are asked to think about the process as a whole are in favor of some kind of world in which we want children but can't
12:05 am
afford a not the standard value we can all agree on. >> i would actually reframe less about having our public policy be guarded by compromise and more guided by science. caught mark surabaya acura public policy analysis, by studies that showed been like what are the rewards reaped from investment in public funding of contraception or in having everyone be insured as a society and what is a society do we gain from not? where the consequences consequences if we don't? it has been very disappointing to see you the ways in which the last two years science has been pushed out of so much of our legislative process. there are bills that have been enacted across the country, requiring medical providers to
12:06 am
give statements to women coming for services, frequently abortion services based on untrue science. that is a scary moment regardless of how you feel about abortion and which are personal or legal police are about that, to require medical professionals to mislead their patients is not where we should be and i think those types of scientific facts inaccurate public policy analyses should be given much more credence and are government process and our ideology. [applause] >> i think it's fair to ask this question. i received some e-mails on positions another's to that they don't be that birth control pills are the magic bullet that everyone thinks it is.
12:07 am
essentially as they list reasons for this commotion included studies about medical risk associated with the pill or not following medical issues that has been prescribed for her. it essentially boiled down to that is not seen as a preventative health measure. i just want the panel to weigh in on what you think. >> as a medical provider will we follow the best of science. so much descender statement about separating science from ideology, we followed the american college of obstetrics and gynecology, the american economy and we look to the best positions in science nationally. we recognize not only do 99% of the women use birth control at some point, sells for 90% effective in approved by a federal judge administration fda. so we recognize this is basic preventive birth control and
12:08 am
something that is absolutely important to access. what i would say is there are physicians among us who are more ideologically sound been following the science of the practice. i have met them and i try to meet them. focus on compromise. science and ideology, science and religion will never come 100% together. we've based everything on medical fact and evidence-based medicine versus spirituality and ideology. it is my belief that there is room for compromise, that we can look towards improving health outcomes of communities, like infant mortality rates. women, especially here at a very large into mortality rate issue. one of the causes is transmitted infections. by stripping away call centers, it is not going to help the infant mortality rate.
12:09 am
in restricting women from accessing birth control is not going to prevent the need for abortion. >> you know, i am sure that you cannot watch tv during the news hours for more than five minutes without seeing a commercial. [applause] so when you do hear about the risks, i'm wondering are they going to stop providing on this help plans, or it -- [applause] or, my sister is in town briefly and we were watching tv the other night and there is this long list of horrible summary were sane, but charges that? i never want to take that chart. it was for hair growth for bald men. i'm wondering if they're going to stop covering not because there's risks involved.
12:10 am
[laughter] [applause] >> i want to agree with linda, but not with the. [laughter] >> science tells us there are some risk with the birth control pills, but there are risks with everything. and therefore, you just have to make up your decision. and unfortunately come as so many of those written by lawyers. she's never going to give me any money. >> i think that it is important to know about the risks and that's why women need to talk with medical professionals are making choices. but it's also one of the reasons why when many choices about which option of contraception works for them.
12:11 am
[applause] >> not every option is going to be ripe for an individual women based on the rest of her medical history and health care and that is why you find it so problematic when we see these letters to the editor and what have you come to saint anyone can afford $9 a month. first of all, not anyone can afford $9, the second leg, not every woman can take $9 amid contraception and have it made her medical needs. we don't go to the bargain basement for medicine. we go to the doctor. [applause] >> my 17-year-old daughter was in the audience tonight and i have to ask, what lessons do you think young women and girls should take away from this focus on women's reproductive rights? and how can they become empowered by this discussion?
12:12 am
>> i thought a lot about young women over the last few men and they were actually one of the main reasons that i took some of the positions on stands that i did when i originally was verbally attacked in the media. i considered whether to step back and save my family and personal friends and community a lot of heart ache in the process. and one of the reasons that i did not do that, but i continue to speak out and engage publicly, regardless of that type of criticism was because i wanted to make sure that young girls didn't see what had happened at the cautionary tale and didn't come away from the situation thinking i'm not going to raise my hand and express opinions civics class and i'm never going to participate in public dialogue or engage in the
12:13 am
political process because my god, look what happened to her. i don't want that to happen in the playground, or i don't want that to happen to me when i'm older. i will make my career choices to avoid that. so i've really tried to connect myself in a way that would provide an example to young women that you can survive and people will stand with you and they will call out this type of inappropriate rhetoric for what it is and it's not a reason to turn away from being involved in our civic process and in our government. [applause] but i do think that there is another massive hui can take away from not just how i was treated and how women whose contraception were treated, but from the dialogue we have about
12:14 am
the policies is that we absolutely need male legislative and male alike at officials who prioritize help in understanding care about these issues. the men we have on this panel tonight. but we need more women in office. [applause] and some of the members in congress are known to say, if women are not at the table, we are on the menu. and that needs to change. so i really do hope that young women in college are thinking about the career options. and i know many of us in this ideological years are thinking, how to make a difference in the world? how to change things for the better consider going into elected office and engaging in this process as a way to have that kind of impact.
12:15 am
we have seen unprecedented numbers of pieces of legislation attacking women's access to health care over the last few years. you can call that a war on whatever you want. i don't want to fight about the terminology, but we have seen those numbers and one important way to change that is not only to vote based on it, to speak out about it, but to run for office and talk about which issues would rather see addressed by our government. [applause] >> i have to ask, do you plan to run for office at some point? [cheers and applause] >> press and the journalist is for me to last night. >> maybe someday. it's not what i'm focused on right now, but i've had folks suggest that demand is something i'm willing to consider in the future potentially.
12:16 am
mostly because i would be a giant hypocrite if i sat here and told all of you we need more young women in office, but not me. i've had enough. so will see possibly someday, but it is not my focus at the moment. >> i'd vote for her. [applause] >> anybody here tonight is not registered to vote, there's voter registration cards outside this room. but have your voice be heard. >> at this point, i think would like to open it up to questions from the audience. so if you would, as you go to the microphone, there's a lot of people here who would like to get questions then. i ask is you keep your questions very concise and ensures that we can get as many people to the microphone as possible. i will chat to remind you if you go on a little too long.
12:17 am
>> audi, nick golding, firstly, thank you for coming to speak. i appreciate it. i'm a freshman here. is that this issue isn't about government spending. i think that's kind of missing the point. this is government coercion in regards to private organizations. the hh versus insurance companies to provide contraception. and those companies will pass this cost five to individual spirits are not only is this going to be validated my opinion, honestly not for you all, the religious aspect, by forcing them to get contraception, but it's also pushing cost to individual taxpayers who are having to pay for the rising insurance costs. how do you justify that? >> alachua asked that question because there is a lot of misconception in that area. can they had sent to this? i know several other research
12:18 am
institutions have verified that this will not increase the cost of the insurance payment costs for all of us. again, on again, on the use of taxpayer, that is not what the policy related to taxpayers does not result in a net cost increase. >> cannot assess your question? are you against social security? >> right now, i think it should been created in the first place. >> forcing you to pay for me and another five years when i can no longer walk up stairs myself. >> seriously because we live in a society. we live in a community and one of the issues about what we hear about in terms not just a birth control, but if anything, is why should you have to pay for something you don't want? i grew up during the vietnam area and i said my compatriots would say.
12:19 am
why should i pay for a war i don't believe in? the answer is because we as a society passed a law. so i understand you don't want to do it. a lot of things i don't want to pay for but i do. so i'm in the answer is what is going on, vote the bums out if you don't like the law that you have. >> okay, thank you. next question, please. >> hello. i came to america 25 years ago in an america with liberty and freedom to have this discussion. i understand you will totally disagree with what i heard from tonight. i would tell you that women are already dying. to perform some some abortions with women who died. science says that life begins at conception. you are talking about the right
12:20 am
of women. what about the right of those women, are those men who are inside of mothers when? because you may say it's my body, my choice, but those do not have the right for themselves. i've just come here to express my voice, as many others. i am a minority here. i know that. most americans believe in the right to live and the right of liberty and the right of freedom. >> the question i have for you is what do you think about abortion being performed in many clinics increasing planned parenthood. >> excuse me, ma'am. you're a specific question? >> that's a question. how do you feel about abortions as they are happening. women are dying because these are being performed and clinics that planned parenthood. thank you. >> the way i would answer that question is your scientific fact is actually wrong.
12:21 am
[applause] if you like to obstetrics and gynecology, there's a different factor x and itu and i'm happy to get you decide verso you know go. in relation to the complexity of abortion services, we understand that it is a complex topic. it is our believe that we don't walk in the shoes of the women who walk into our health centers across the country. only they know the situation that they are in. we provide medically accurate information. we encourage them to look to their family, to their friends, to their social surveys organizations that can help them make the decision right for them and we know that abortion is safe and legal in the united states and one of our aspects of our mission is to ensure the permanent safe safe, legal access to all services they believe that they need.
12:22 am
[applause] >> i don't know where she went, but let me say i can feel the pain in your voice and i understand that. i think that my view of when life begins does not match yours, but i don't discount that you have strong feelings about that. this is a very hard issue. it is an issue in which our religious and spiritual views can clash. and there's no way i can convince you that life doesn't begin at conception and there's no way you can convince me that it does. the problem is that we don't respect that fact. that will become to hate people who disagree with us. the wonderful glory of the united states is that we, together. and i really want that. [applause]
12:23 am
>> hi, the entire premise of this event has been women's health care. you also mentioned risks and how is there a risk that varies with birth control. but i would just ask you if you are aware of the myoclonic article -- nato, thank you for correct demands pronunciation. the mayo clinic. i believe it's in minnesota. it's very well respected as i'm sure you know. they released an article in october 2006, saying that women who were on oral contraceptives before their first full term pregnancy increase the risk of breast cancer by 44%. and i mean, you talk about risk factors and weighing them and you talk about science and health. is this really something that the government should be subsidizing? are you aware of this article? encourager went to google mayo clinic, october 2006 and read
12:24 am
the article. >> and again, we look toward evidence-based medicine and nationwide, it has been proven that birth control is 90% effect when used consistently and it is approved by our fda and has been for many, many decades. so the 99% of the women in the room who remain healthy for many reasons because birth control doesn't just prevent earth, it also helps individuals with ovarian cysts, hormonal levels in women. there's many reasons to use birth control other than to just prevent a pregnancy. [applause] >> can can i just had one thing? i think you have to be careful there. the mayo clinic did not say that. someone associated with the mayo clinic said that.
12:25 am
[applause] >> is published. go google it. >> linda enwright read an article or speak somewhere, smu doesn't agree with us. [laughter] >> there's also repeated studies that show use of contraception reduces many other forms of cancer as well. so again, these are medical decisions for an individual woman to make with your doctor with the benefit of all of this. [applause] [applause] >> hi, my name is becca and i just want to thank you for coming. my question is little unlike my predecessors. all due respect. we have been talking a lot tonight about the goal of plurality and the government and force is being heard. a recent set of his post about
12:26 am
how women stand back in a male dominated society and moreover, with marshall's integrity to a high standard is in consistently applied to women while simultaneously windward women's bodies, both hyper visible and an visible, how we say it -- how do we fight and how the law hopeless if there is a fundamental dissonance within the application of the law, how can we use that law to assist us? [applause] >> well, one of the things you are pointing to is the way in which women's health and reproductive health are framed as different from the rest of health care. and that is it is disconcerting that event from advocates of women's health care access, we hear so much that should be important to women and women should vote on this woman should be concerned about this. but this is an issue important to an entire family. both partners should be thinking about how they are preventing
12:27 am
pregnancy and how they are taking those precautions. and i imagine many of the women -- i'm sorry, many of the men in this term care about the women's in their lives and care about them having access to the health health care that they need. so that is one step we need to take, to make this about broader health care and not be treated unique and different and singled out for different types of legislative action. clap knock >> there is so much on the book now that looks at women came years that has been created by various court that deal with equal protection. for example, a few years ago the supreme court said that women had to be admitted to the virginia military institute. and the major reason for that was that women tonight that admission did not have equal access to the power involved in
12:28 am
virginia. so when you see a supreme court in the united states talking about access to power and women's ability to have access to power and created a supreme court precedent based on not. so we can use that to leverage more of what is going on. we need bright, intelligent individuals who would rather work for those kinds of things down for hedge funds or go to that law firms who are only going to help hedge funds in order to do it. really, in the last 30, 40 years in the united states we've created great legal precedent and now we need to get someone to start applying it. [applause] >> good evening. my name is virginia and i am a graduate of smu law school.
12:29 am
in fact, i have my professor here. >> i kept looking, saying i know this woman. >> , to say that i am the american june. i came within 25 years ago to the united states of america with empty hands. i didn't have 1 dollar in my pocket. i had two kids with me and another one in my belly. i learned english, went to smu, three-story three kids is a single mom. the first one graduated from smu law school, the second from harvard law school, the second from harvard law school in the third one from air force academy. this is the glory at the united states of america. also, i came from communist romania. i live half of my life in a free
12:30 am
land and i live half of my life on the government controlled. which he presented today, it's not only dangerous for women because it's not going to take care of them are people, but it is dangerous for government control of our lives. it is more than any law presented to us before. do you know that according to those laws, the government will have control on your account, so if you don't pay what you're supposed to pay, the government will take money from your account. ..
12:31 am
no way you will -- >> i don't mean to cut you off, but do you have a specific question. >> yes. >> to you know all those things, i can tell you a lot of things about the system and health care, what provides and what cannot provide. all the things that are so dangerous for our freedom, not only for religious freedom, but for all freedom as free people in united states. >> thank you very much. >> thank you for sharing your concerns. unfortunately i think you to have some of formation that is not quite correct about what the law does. [applause]
12:32 am
so i would just encourage you to a to some additional research on that because those consequences are actually not included in the four will correct. >> okay. next question. >> zillow. this is more of their requests for comment. alan tubbs to keep it brief. however on the subject of teaching young girls about how they can exert their power in the system in which we currently left, we have a political landscape that is moving progressively to the right. democrats now, the right of whether republicans or in the fifties. we have republicans to attack, democrats to retrieve, and so will we talk about let's talk politics i think perhaps that if you desire to vote to what do so, but that energy needs to be put into social movements and which we demand of our own terms will we want and what we need in
12:33 am
our lives rather than putting faith in an elected official and crossing our fingers and helping the do we what. specifically for our contemporary example, the students were on strike for months because there was a proposed tuition hike which this it was completed in a typical. they said, we will not play to cut pay. eric wright to be in the streets. try to make protests illegal and what has come of this? the tuition hike to not go through and the law forbidding protests was repealed. i think perhaps -- >> again, would you please ask a question. >> and up. it's terrible. my question, i suppose, would be what to use the as the value of social movements for political change? >> thank you. >> thank you very much for that example. that think hopefully folks realize that the reason i was asked to test final four members of congress was because of my work on such as social movement. there were students on our
12:34 am
campus to organize collectively to address this concern and he saw that georgetown was providing and subsidizing contraception on insurance for their employees but not for students, even as students were paying entirely for their own insurance. and so we were organizing to adjust that. eventually it came to an impasse on those efforts. we needed to turn more to the legislative and regulatory process, but i think it is interesting that you describe them as being too options that were separated from each other because i would integrate the more. and i think it's unfortunate that frequently in this country we look at democracy as something that we do on a tuesday in november and not the rest of the time. [applause] i could not agree more that we should not collect an official to office and then sit back and think okay. i voted the right way.
12:35 am
it will take care of it. we have to hold our elected officials accountable for their actions. we have to pay close attention to their actions and contact their offices and engage in those types of public displays of we are concerned or will we are supportive. any elected official u.s. cotillion that the new that is what because it allows them to stand strong and to be sure that they're representing the interests of the people that were present. social direction good connection to officials of could. [applause] >> my name is catherine mcgovern. in 1969 and graduated from georgetown university law center i feel a certain akin to you. however, most people in this room will not remember that in 1969 but didn't have any right to have contraception. that was the beginning of the
12:36 am
women's rights movement. and was one of the ones who worked for a very hard. i am so happy to see that you are continuing the tradition of georgetown university law center. thank you. [applause] >> thank you for saying so, and thank you for all the work you did at that time because i have that many of the young women in this room along with me recognize how lucky we are for the ways in which our foremothers place these paths for us. i would like to -- i would like to make a request of the women of your generation and the minute your generation as well to talk to us, speak to the young people as you know about what the circumstances were before contraception was required to be legalized constitutionally and what it
12:37 am
looked like for women before they had a constitutional right to a safe and legal abortion. one of the commentators are there was very concerned about when dying from unsafe abortions, and i could not share that concern more because that is what was occurring in our country prior to. [applause] so i hope that you will share those experiences with the young women and men the you know as well so that we understand what is at stake right now. >> next question. >> hello. my name is sally williams, jr. here. i just want to thank the panel for sharing your insights night. my question, would you be open to broaden the scope of your activism by collaborating with conservative women and the fight for liberation of oppressed females around the world who, for example, are sold as sex slaves are currently living under sharia law?
12:38 am
>> i would not characterize it as broadening because those are issues i have been addressing for years. i actually have worked john a host of legislative initiatives and with the variety of organizations that address sex trafficking, human trafficking, as simple terms, sex slavery, and am very concerned about and have worked hand-in-hand with many conservatives on as well as liberal women on those issues. terms of sharia law and women's rights around the world, that is something am very concerned about. i have engaged in advocacy in can and in a variety of contexts to address international women's rights. i don't want to project the sound to you because your question was very appropriately phrased. i am concerned that in the dialogue politically recently this has been set up as a choice of either or, that if you are addressing concerns of women in the u.s. that is somehow not addressing concerns of women internationally or that we
12:39 am
should not work on problems your because things are worse in many respects in many countries. i see this as a spectrum, and this is the connective tissue. the problems of women face in this country are related to the problems that women face around the world. and we all need to work, are in on, to address those issues. i see them as all connected. >> thank you. [applause] >> first, i want to tear the few to inaccuracies. how could planned parenthood diagnose breast cancer? you don't to mammograms. women come and fervor furls, sometimes they are charged. i know this. >> and happy to answer that. chris and i finished. >> as to whether a time. how we diagnose breast health exam. women come into our center kimono and 20,000, we provide
12:40 am
rest of exams emanuel exams. we teach women have never taught before how to do self exams. and they feel an abnormality we help them, like every other gynecology office, how many of you have a mammogram magneticcology office verses of the radiology office across the hall or the mobile pornography unit? >> that is not diagnosing. >> says, it is actually. then they send the results of us and we, their medical provider who provided the referral then provide case management services. >> here is my question. >> access care and ongoing care, such as the story of baena the shared, and a half pitch for you to into one of our 28 hostages and show you how we do this. [applause] >> it is the fact that the who, who has testified the birth control pill as a group one carcinogen.
12:41 am
>> i believe we have answered that question. >> this is my question. >> the correct and as my question. >> absolutely. please to. >> out as planned parenthood which bills itself as a loss of organization aggressively provide, sell, and promote a carcinogen for young women's bodies and you and i both know that most john women of 13, 15, and 80 have no idea they're putting a carcinogen in their bodies. >> again, i would come back to medical fact and science. according to evidence based medicine. >> this is the who. >> scientific based medicine and the birth control is safe and it is 98 percent effective. in relation to talking to the 13 and 15-year-old, we believe that is a role the parent. what we do every single day is encourage parents to have conversations with their
12:42 am
children. the vast majority of teenagers and texas want to hear from their parents about their bodies . planned parenthood is a partner to parents in teaching you about the science, scientific fact. that we have to you teach them about the morality, you're gone, and your views on science. again, we believe that all people have the right to scientifically based medically accurate information. [applause] >> hi. i'm laura. anti-catholic wife of one mother of two. i am here to honor give probably a different perspective and you have given thus far about contraception. i hope to of be a voice of a different option for all these beautiful men and women in the audience. i have been married for 20 years and embrace the gift of the catholic teaching about contraception, but before our
12:43 am
marriage. for the last 16 of these 20 years i have a medical condition that rendered pregnancy -- pcs become a potentially life-threatening for me. in that context of want to let people know hear the natural family planning is a scientifically based well researched option. you can learn about the way that your body functions and how to recognize changes in your body that signal different phases of fertility are not. and three using that you can determine whether on any given day to engage in intercourse seeking pregnancy or to refrain from seeking to avoid pregnancy. this is something that can be a tremendous gift relationships as well as teaching you tremendous amount about your body, building up in health, regardless of your spiritual beliefs. >> i have a question. >> well, there is. i would like to see what the
12:44 am
panel would recommend about this, and i would also like to let everyone know that i will be ready by the door if anybody wants information on website security to educate themselves about this. i just have one more. natural family planning can be used to 99 percent effectiveness which is significantly greater than a lot of the contraceptives . >> thank you. >> have you looked at the population in south america recently? [laughter] i'm mean, let me answer this. i think that i personally believe a lot of what he said is valid. i really, when i teach constitutional law, i deal with the issue of sodomy and the laws against sodomy in the united states. i ask my students why was it banned? and it was not just -- southerly applies to both homosexual and
12:45 am
heterosexual intercourse. i ask them why it was banned in all of these states. and the reason was a deeply held belief, and one which i share in wish that when people get together to express their love your sexuality it should be an expression of love and not just the need to have a physical release because then we are using another human being for our own pleasure. i find that immoral. however, it is absolutely true that what you're talking about is not as effective form of birth control as what is provided with your scientific means. and i cannot sit here and let you say that is valid. all the things i read show me not. i don't think people should have sex just to have sex. on the other hand, that does not mean they should not protect their family and their other children from having more pregnancies than they can support. when i looked at the poverty in the world in africa and asia and
12:46 am
south america, i am appalled by the catholic church is response to this. [applause] >> excuse me. i would like to of -- may respond? i would like to just make one very quick point in response. that would be -- >> you really have to try and get in as many questions as possible. i understand tow and emotional some of these issues are, but it's not fair to the people behind you. >> but it's not fair to invoke science and then make brought comments that are not on the basis of science. i encourage a real deep look at the scientifically based studies about the effectiveness of natural family planning, and i want to encourage especially of a minimum in this audience. >> thank you very much. >> in queue. >> hello. i think it is appalling that the discourse in our society has evolved sets that you are greeted with insults instead of
12:47 am
real dialogue command that should never be the case. [applause] i would like to add that this panel could have been an opportunity to have more engagement in dialogue, and i hope that going for the women's engendered such a program and every human rights would work toward not necessarily a debate, but a panel with unilateral views on a topic that is very contentious. i do have one specific question, and that is when both you and the professor spoke of the not excepting the compromise that was positioned to make this seem to me a bit of a distinction without a difference. if i -- either i pay for something myself that i oppose or i pay for somebody who must provide this thing that i oppose i wonder if you can just elaborate on why that since a brilliant solution and what you
12:48 am
think the bishops, they continue to not see that. why i see that as not really much of a compromise. >> my taxes pay for an awful lot of things that i opposed. [applause] >> just to be clear, the up position is that the institution's money does not go toward the care that they object to. that is why i see it as an appropriate a well intentioned and well functioning agreement. the money goes from the women's pockets to do the insurance that they are part of. while there may be other folks who are part of the same insurance plans to disagree, that happens a lot of ways. i may disagree with someone else's of purchases. i'm sure there are folks on insurance plans to double even by transfusions, but part of being part of an insurance plan is that we're all putting our money in and trusting that it will be medical treatment that
12:49 am
is prescribed by doctors with a person and we recognize and honor each other's choices about our own health care decisions. >> the institution doesn't seem to get a choice. >> thank you. think that is all the we really have time for this evening. m sorry. i know how, you know, an emotional these issues are. we did have a lively discussion. i would like to thank our panelists for joining us this evening. [applause] and also, thanks to the women in gender studies for putting this program together. [applause] >> i just wanted to make a closing comment if you will allow me. you don't have to sit down and everything. it's a quick comment. i know that some of the comments
12:50 am
have raised contentious issues and what we were talking about was a difficult topic for some tonight. i want to thank all of you who engage in dialogue respectfully and even for those who ask questions or came here to make a point that they disagreed with me or with the rest of the panel i want to say thank you for engaging in the process, for speaking out about something new was important to you, making your voice is heard on issues and being part of a conversation i would much rather have someone here disagree with me that have apathy rain. thank you all for coming tonight. [applause] >> thank you and good evening. >> the only vice presidential debate thursday night live on c-span, c-span radio command on
12:51 am
line at watch and engaged. coming up next here on c-span2, the vice president of spain's largest bank talks about the european debt crisis. that is followed by a discussion on the foreign policy plan. tomorrow morning's washington journal a look at the open presidential debate. chairman of a group that trains republican candidates for office. then washington bureau chief uncovered the video of mitt romney talking about the up 47 percent of americans. a look at medicare's growing cost washington journal is live every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern on c-span.
12:52 am
>> live thursday watch and engage with c-span as the vice-presidential candidates meet in their only debate from center college in danville kentucky. our live debate reviews such as 7:00 p.m. eastern and at nine abc news chief foreign correspondent moderates the 90 minute debate focusing on foreign and domestic policy. after the debate your reactions and comments. >> the vice-president. >> want to go back to last i'l comment, and then i will come back. the reason they keep trying tooo hallburtrta is because they want to onobscure their own you missed 33 of 36 million.gui. almost 70 percent of thein millions of the intelligenceyous committee. he missed a lot of key votes ons tax policy policy, energy, medicare reform, your hometown newspaper
12:53 am
has taken to calling you senator gone. you've got one of the worst attendance records in the united states senate. now, in my capacity as vice president, i am the president of the senate, the presiding officer. i'm up in the senate most tuesdays when they're in session. the first time i ever met you was when you walked on the stage tonight. with respect to israel and palestine, gwen, the suicide bombers in part were generated by saddam hussein, who paid $25,000 to the families of suicide bombers. i personally think one of the reasons that we don't have as many suicide attacks today in israel as we had in the past is because saddam's no longer in business. we've been strong supporters of israel. if president stepped forward and put in place a policy basically that said we will support the establishment of two states. the first president ever to say establish and support a palestinian state next door to
12:54 am
israelis. but first, there has to be an interlocking agreement you can trust and deal with. we don't have that now. with yasser arafat there has to be reform. >> senator edwards. >> that was a complete distortion of my record. i know that may come as a shock. i'm surprised to hear the vice president talk about records. when he was one of 435 members of the united states house, he was one of 10 to vote against head start, one of four to vote against banning plastic weapons that can pass through metal detectors. he voted against the department of education. he voted against funding for meals on wheels for seniors. he voted against a holiday for martin luther king. he voted against a resolution calling for the release of nelson mandela in south africa. it's amazing to hear him criticizing my record or john kerry's. >> 30 seconds. >> i think his record speaks
12:55 am
>> the vice-president, one of the world's largest banks said that spain is making positive steps to get back on sound fiscal round. but the peterson institute international economics in washington d.c. this is an hour and ten minutes. >> let me welcome all of you today to our peterson institute for international economics. the crisis of the euro continues to be at the center of the global economic agenda. spain has now moved close to the center of the crisis of the euro . the spanish making system is obviously a critical part.
12:56 am
not only the leading spanish bank but the largest bank in the entire eurozone. at think we have an ideal speaker today to address the whole series of problems that we think about in the context of the european crisis. the representative of the bank which is at the one hand and the middle of the spanish banking system, and the other hand the largest bank in spain, one of the leading international banks in the world and one which by any measure is solid beyond her approach in a very unique position to give us an appraisal of both the spanish economic outlook and particularly the prospects for the spanish banking system and how they may be addressed in order to resolve the spanish crisis and the european crisis more broadly. our speaker spent a number of years in the spanish government
12:57 am
from 1977 to '82. he was an active participant in the negotiations for spanish entry to what is now the european union and the european economic unity. he also participated in a number of spanish negotiations in the wto and with the european union as spain was entering into the union after the -- after democracy was restored in spain in spain was welcomed into the european community process. in the last year of his government he was minister of the presidency, played a central role in the entire spanish government situation. shortly thereafter he joined marcos' son to and has been there for almost 20 years. he is now vice chairman of the bank, member of the board, also a member of the board of
12:58 am
banesto, the chairman and portugal, the member of the board of a number of other financial companies in the group and is president of the prince of austria's foundation in spain as i say, i think we are guilty plea privileged today to have a speaker from. [indiscernible] with its unique ability to see both the spanish situation, the overall situation in europe, and to do so from a position of great strength. so it is great to host year to date. we look forward to your remarks. [applause] >> thank-you for your very kind presentation. good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen. is for me a great pleasure and a great honor to address this very
12:59 am
distinguished audience. a privilege to pontificate end these well-known meetings of that tennis foundation. thank you for being here today. i will try to grab my presentation to concentrate what i consider the key points because you have all the material with you. you can look through it whenever you think it is useful. concentrate in some relevant aspect. first of all, as everybody knows , there is duality in the emerging countries. the fact that 15 of businesses in emerging countries, 15%. a unique perspective to understand what is going on in this duality.
1:00 am
already underlying health low world is progressing in no way that the mature economy. emerging economies. to sound situation. if you compare what is happening in the u.s. in terms of the design of the framework of macroeconomics, totally different. you have a degree of flexibility . ready to intervene in order to apply a policy. in europe is processes very cumbersome. it is a process through which decisionmaking is extremely complex and we lack of proper lender of last resort. we have to apply a very restrictive fiscal policy.
1:01 am
we don't have the ten times with that. sufficiently. we lack a lender of last resort. there is a situation of stability and the sovereign debt market. an example for that in this chart you see the spread of government debt in spain and italy compared with germany. this spreads went as high as nearly 650 basis points compared . to worked within the union. in this case spain and italy, would we have to pay for our debt on top of 400 basis points
1:02 am
today in order to properly fund ourselves? this creates a number of problems because the various correlation between the spread of the sovereign debt and that cost of borrowing for the corporate in spain and the banks in spain. that means our credit, the monetary policy, we are having spreads for customers. much higher. give you an example. spain, they have to compete with the rest of europe. this question, the way to solve this question is geared to of bank. one of the results back in june was precisely to try to establish a banking unit with a
1:03 am
single provider and deposit money. sovereign debt. bud the look how this will affect. we have both domestic problem, the result of large increase in the private and public debt in the expansion. once we enter into the problems we have this coupled with the black. so you have an economic of ministration as a result of the need to deliver the economy and regain the competitiveness this been lost in the first ten years of the economic union. then you have to address the problem of the sector finals and
1:04 am
then you have to adjust the problem of the financial sector. the process of delivery in terms of the gdp has set a very important impact as ec. the spanish economy, the growth, very significant over the last -- the first seven years. the currency in excess of%. then we have a kind of double dip of the economy. no according to the economy. the region of one. it's also an additional agility in the region.
1:05 am
if you compare with the average of the eurozone in terms of growth the spanish economy, the average of your during the first seven years. well, trying to address this economic problem the government is taking some measures in my view perry positive ones. pension reform, delaying their retirement age to 67 years. very important, labour reform that addresses the question of the rigidity of the labour market in spain. that is one of the reasons why the spanish economy gets an unemployment rate as high as 25% . this is the root of that labour
1:06 am
market. the government has done. trying to reach -- deregulates financial restructuring to clean up the balance sheets and to create a proliferation of the banking. in terms of the financial it will be important. we have dual financial system. on one hand you have commercial banks, privately-owned, listed in the markets. you have 50 percent of the system. the very or government assistance, very much political influence in the appointments to the government units. and too much concentrated in real estate. and because of the problems happening today in the spanish economy. as a result of these financial
1:07 am
restructurings will no longer have to be embarrassed. there have been restructuring shrinking the capacity and in the process of free injecting capitol, we think that the combination of additional capital for this segment of the spanish sector is trying to have a very sound and competitive financial sector. this is one of the positive outlooks and this economy. another positive element besides this restructuring aren't the second sector. compared with the other countries of the eurozone and with the average eurozone,
1:08 am
having growing recently faster than the average eurozone. that means that the spanish economy competitiveness as is shown in the level and also a very important elements which is the unit. making us lose competitiveness during many years. have you seen this chart? starting with the year 2010 we are recovering competitiveness through allowing of the unit labor costs. so we have a picture. we are trying to address the fundamental problems to reform. at the same times these reforms are having a positive impact in terms of regaining competitiveness for the economy. another important element is the public sector deficit, and the stability of the government debt . another important structural reform is being put into the
1:09 am
spanish constitution, the financial stability law. that means that the government is going to be more able to meet their objectives and to put a degree of control on the expenses and the deficit. the government can control the expenditures from the central government. another part of the government. you have unique tools in order to make that complied. now, the government as the proper tools to address these issues. in the process of addressing the fiscal situation, we have a totally out of control deficit in year 2009. deficit exceeding 11% of its gdp. now we and the royal of reducing the deficit. the very important issue is
1:10 am
about the capacity of the government to get to the 6% public sector deficits. as the greek of skepticism in the markets, the capacity of the government. the government is confident that we can get to this figure. if they work to get their it will be very important positive message from market. spain is able to comply with the objectives of production in private sector deficit. next year for a half percent. going into less than 3% the year after. is that going to be easy because when you have the economy in a recessionary environment it's very difficult to increase revenues and is very difficult to reduce the expenses because a lot of expenses are linked with the macroeconomics situation. in terms of the financial sector
1:11 am
we had to address a problem of real-estate -- real funding, the capacity and corporate governance and transparency. most of this issue is linked with the saving banks because by definition this saving banks were operating with real-estate that was where the degree of concentration that creates a lot of problems for these banks. in terms of funding there was also a problem because there was us light problem to work with some of the institutions, the capacity, the cost of funding of this week's segment of the sector, much more effective. it was a problem for the system over capacity. the overcapacity in the spanish financial sector, the region of 30%, and this problem is going to be addressed because as a result of the injection of public sector money, the process is going to take in terms of the
1:12 am
restructuring of the sector. it is going to bunt the banks that have been the object of private-sector money restructure in a very aggressive fashion. and then once again in the corporate governance the fact that you have a 50% of the system without proper market controls, the system of corporate governance very much influence the political aspects meant also as the transformation to banks, the institution and having some of them are most of them listed in the market is going to address this issue of corporate governance. some of the restructuring, the financial sector and even more so, very much detail elements. this element which is very important colleges according
1:13 am
with the sign by the spanish government to my european union. the injection of european money into a spanish bank. there was a number of compromises accepted by the government. one of the most important being the fact that the system grows through the process of stress testing. an exercise. you exercise top down. and being done in a very independent fashion because this exercise, the participation of the european central bank. the imf. the european union. that means it was very comprehensive. focus in terms of the scenario that you see in the slide. expecting the economy or putting ourselves in the position of the
1:14 am
economy shrinking colleges and us going to happen. certainly that 2 percent decline. the year 2014. the decline to underline another important point of unemployment rate going through the roof to 27%. housing prices decline in growth to 20% this year. foreign and a half% next year. i mean, very tough scenario. and when you analyze the impact of the very adverse an area on the spanish banks, the figures recently published in which the region, 25 billion euros of capital in spite of this very adverse. and on the other hand you have a number of banks formerly saving banks with the exception of
1:15 am
banco popular. that requires according to this exercise 54 billion euros. the only exception a formerly tarsal bank is launched in the right issue. a two and a half billion euros, and the overcome. the overcome all of these requirements by their own means. going to the market. no government help. that means that the costs of these crises in terms of injection of additional capital will be in the region of 40- 50000000000 euros which is a manageable amount in terms of the spanish gdp which we are talking between 405% of the spanish gdp which is not an insurmountable amount. that means that regardless, this
1:16 am
injection of capital has been done to the government, and adding to their government debt or injected into the bank in which case is not adding to the government debt. we're talking 4%. this is @booktv number of discussions with this number is to be injected into the government or the bank. at the end of the day regardless of where it goes to the injection of capital, we're talking about not very large amounts in terms of that debt adding to the gdp. well, let's now to end up with this analysis, what is? obviously it has to be. you see the profit of the banks, the crisis clang and reaching. this first semester, and you have record year with 12 billion
1:17 am
of earnings. so very resilience. as a result basically the diversification, the fact that we have a system of stand-alone subsidiaries that protect through firewalls the bank if any systemic crisis would happen in any of the markets and which we operate, we are banking operation. we are mostly a banking operation.
1:18 am
we have our risk culture. usc, 6%. 4 percent in emerging markets. we have roughly speaking a half of our earnings. countries such as the u.s. or the u.k. or germany. a very important chunk of our business. diversification is the key aspect and understanding. the resilience against the crisis. the fact of having a decentralized activity means that if any crisis were to happen in one of the markets and which we are, we are able to
1:19 am
fire wall, to have a fire wall around this element of crisis affecting our balance sheet just by the investment done in those countries. we don't spillover impact and other segments of our business. when we presented to bank of spain, this work to we underlined and the bank of spain affected this as one of the great strengths. the stand alone independence subsidiary. the fact of having the banking operation, it gives us a source of stable liquidity in not only independent from financial markets. we find ourselves basically with operation full deposit. another interesting feature.
1:20 am
to the extent, as you see here, the total loan to deposit, about 100 percent. we're talking about 170% which is practically we are funding deposits and with the very strong position in court capital according to the bi s. relations. about 10%. in terms of efficiency, which is key for any banking operation using this chart hell it makes us of very extremely competitive bank in all the markets in which you operate. in times of crisis also the fact we have an extremely efficient bank is also helping us very much. well, for us we have reached management. very unique. there are a structure in which
1:21 am
their risk management is totally independent from the business unit. the directors. the meeting to analyze the policy of the bank. five members of the board. we have a very robust governance and management. it has served as very well throughout. willing to up try to answer any questions you may have about this presentation. we think that the financial sector faces a challenge. some of these aspects, the implications are not affecting due to our business model. in europe is in a critical one. , and we have in europe to put
1:22 am
in place the proper mechanism in order to address the issue of the lender of sovereign debt. the recent approaches by the european central bank in this direction that provided in this report for the sovereign debt and the eurozone which is critical in this stage. more so looking bored to the structure. the european banking union will be a significant step forward. i think that it's going to take time to have this in place because to change, the addition of 6,000 banks in europe, a tough job. some questions are to the ability of europe to put in place this system of supervision as it was announced before this
1:23 am
part of next year. spain is under severe economic financial adjustments, but there are many elements, positive elements in terms of the factual reforms that are being made. so i am an optimist that swing is going to be able to handle the problem of the private sector debt as it has handled the problem of the external debt prior to the crisis went as high as 10% of the gdp. the end of the year is going to be at one-and-a-half percentage points of gdp. the adjustment that we have made in the external sector, i think we are going to be able to do it also with the dead. and also, i think that the crisis has been very positive to
1:24 am
to the elements that i have been underlining earlier. basically diversification of business to be very in the direction of retaining a banking operation. very focused on that without diverting into activities that are not our core competencies and working in markets where we have critical mass and a definite competitive advantage. thank you very much for your attention. that will be more than willing to try to answer your questions. thank you very much for your attention. [applause] >> thank you very much for that very comprehensive presentation. you raise lots of questions, and
1:25 am
i will try to follow up on a couple myself and open it up to the audience. i would like to ask one question about the overall economy as vain. what about the banking system. one of your most important charts, i thought, showed the comparative evolution in the major european countries including spain. and if i interpret the sled correctly, you show that spain has already achieved an internal devaluation of about 10% over the last three years. one question is, how did you do that? the next question is, how much more is necessary? there is still a gap of about 10% between spain and the euro average against germany which i guess people have to trudge up proximate to eliminate the internal imbalances within the union. so two questions. how has the internal devaluation
1:26 am
been received? , smores needed? cut the you get that? >> when you look at the rates for unemployment in spain and how they went sharply upbound, the positive element ha is that we are regaining competitiveness it has cost us a lot in terms of social unrest and the questions related to the labour market. a positive element, the capacity of restructuring has been extremely positive. also there has been a moderation in the labor cost. because of effective ways that we are monitoring the dialogue and also because the fact that the economy is in a very weak state means that the demands for
1:27 am
increases in wages and not that evidence. >> the fact that any time did you make this kind of internal devaluation it costs you a lot of in terms of increased unemployment. the new revelation in terms of labour and future cycles. you're not going to witness the sharp increase upon employment that you are suggesting the economy. so we are still having to move in the direction of reducing these imbalances with europe. a good trend, and my expectation is through a combination of an increase wage end this century european countries, mostly germany, through moderation and spain we're going to keep this role. because, i mean, the resilience of the sector in spain is remarkable.
1:28 am
spain has not lost a market share in exports. and one of the charts showed how we increase our export much faster than the average of eurozone. so the -- >> even faster than germany. >> that's correct. that means that the spanish competitiveness by definition, the increases of export. well, this is maybe in my view coupled with the fact of that diversification of the last corporation. i mean, you look to the 35 largest corporations in spain, you see that the 35 largest populous, close to 50% outside spain. that means that in spain today we have strength provided by the large corporations well
1:29 am
diversified for the construction companies and providing support for the economy as a whole and for the exporting sector. >> let me turn to the banking system that you addressed. your remarks are very comprehensive, but there was one thing you did not mention. there has been a lot of concern about the kind of rolling we have our deposits in spain of the last months. ..
1:30 am
1:31 am
>> third, you stress in one of the secrets of your success is the emerging markets. you charge of santander 50% of your assets were in an
1:32 am
emerging markets. it shows that was latin america. have not moved into asia period much. is that deliver it? will that change in the future? why? was it a conscious decision not to enter the emerging markets beyond latin america? >> it is important to have the competitive bid vantage. -- advantage. you cannot afford to have
1:33 am
your management capacities i do lose competitive advantage with the local competitiveness. we don't have these elements. first of all, we have local competitive a vantage. but not in asia. with our bare a large markets is difficult to have that proper control. we don't feel it would be a large scale movement more to establish ourselves with the bank like the one in india or indonesia broke while we're trying to do in a jet that this fast-growing and
1:34 am
will have important implications is to profit from the flow of funds. it provided unique opportunities for direct investment to provide opportunities. with the domestic banking in those countries. >> the floor is open for questions. we have a standing microphone and a floating microphone. >> thank you very much will your presentation in. to follow-up on your
1:35 am
strategy this seems the bank of san 10 bair is part of the big banks and is sold out in moscow and have the big ipo in mexico. you have to banks in poland moving to eastern europe but with your answer on asia. >> we had the opportunity with all the elements of the strategy to have the competitive advantage we
1:36 am
knew the market with term may end operations with the structures that has competitive a vantage. then we go to the polish markets also in terms of diversification we divest with russia because the markets decided but the ipo with mexico follows the idea to put it into market first of all, you have market pressure so they haft have
1:37 am
the quarterly results and rethink without pressure there is too many positives. with those cases button with capital and opportunity to raise capital in the area we think is more favorable. now to raise capital in spain with the economic crisis. but 25% of mexico is considerable to give us access to capital we see
1:38 am
adverse circumstances we weren't able to boost the core capital. to have. >> i have a general comment. when you have the restrictive of the policies
1:39 am
borrowed -- the monetary policies in the u.s. and the u.k., i would welcome a flexible policy to be coupled with their policy. i think they're doing a great job to inject 1 trillion euros into the system and then the issue through the framework announced but the european
1:40 am
central bank would be willing in the secondary market provided a sufficient way to do it that this operation could be done itself but on behalf of europe and france you have the double capacity. it is understandable because once you set to emplace of place you have to be sure of the issues.
1:41 am
it is one of the closest of europe. and the union has to except this and the system of conditionality. to the extent it provides a boost so with us standard of today's basis points it has an impact been my view give then the macro economic fundamentals on the basis points so in order to go in that direction of the
1:42 am
sovereign debt position provided against the objective of 6.3% is a very important step in the right direction. >> let me extend that analysis. would do expect the timing with the prime minister request to go into effect there for the lending from the ecb to take place? how do you see the next steps unfolding? >> not so much market pressure from a number of
1:43 am
weeks ago that the spanish sovereign debt that the market pressures to reach out to him. the possibility to fund excess so there is no pressure in the market that means we are in a position to see the conditionality and what is the likely reaction. the minister of finance of
1:44 am
germany to not need to require this type of intervention with the objective of the deaths of-- deficit. then the government of spade expects the conditionality with a prominent member stating that it does not require. >> there is the issue of their private-sector and not to ask for this if the conditions if the government
1:45 am
this disable to comply with that provide good europe is able to answer in a fashion to any demand asks with type of conditionality. to meet there private sector you need additional reforms it is not totally a clarified the position is to wait and see. >> this is on a somewhat different note but once again now ask gain for more
1:46 am
autonomy, to what extent will that be successful and will that influence spain's relationship with the ecb? >> is a situation where the government has to comply with the requirements in terms of the financial implications it has been discussed with some adjustment to but i hope the outcome of this process more
1:47 am
to the financial structure. >> how does that complicate the relationship with the rest of europe? >> gettelfinger at this point* in time i see no reason for the relationship to be changed. i see no reason for europe to be concerned it has no realistic output. >> guy a.m. carious about what you would say about the youth unemployment situation and what is the role of the private sector and others
1:48 am
better and a better position than some? >> the number of persons and not sure contributing for young people with the assistance of santander but this issue is a negative issue because if the employment goes at 50% of fear up the answer to that is once again linked to the labor reform companies need to have its competitiveness so we're in a process of
1:49 am
adjustment i think the new conditions are more flexible so the companies will be more reliable but in the past they we're doing this because if you get it wrong you have to lay off the people a problem of said gdp one problem was the rigidity with the unemployment rate going through the roof you need to address the issue the short-term impact that
1:50 am
the economy is start to go again so high and the more people with the situation and the past. and is in a very positive fashion. >> i am with the chinese news agency from china. the ecb action left time for eurozone reform. how long should we wait to see the the committee of lending to small and medium sized businesses? where the growth drivers in coming years with austerity?
1:51 am
>> in this true if you look at the numbers so of the injection of liquidity was not that important. we have this issue to pay nothing to put liquidity back into the market. but at the end of the day the companies have gone through the cycle. and they had to deal leverage. something very awkward. there is one question the
1:52 am
process of the leverage would be over. it would be a fundamental question in europe but another interesting issue with europe son would aid the german economy to grow faster but the report of the imf will grove 0.9% imagined in the u.s. if you are concerned talk being germany 0.9% in europe we did in gin of the economy to belfast third to help the rest of the economy. more attuned process of july
1:53 am
average where they need to be helped with the stronger economy in europe. >> you mentioned baking unions and stressed it is important but also it will take time to get under way. could you elaborate? is it moving to insurance? what is the most important? your review the european wide banking union should supervise the important banks because it is a practical difficulty? >> menu address the issue of
1:54 am
resolution you have to have the proper tools of the resolution but not to will pay for that so with the time table there are practical implications. sell another supervisor is very tough even a with the local supervisor this is floor compatibility so with
1:55 am
countries like germany or how fast they consider the complexity. it would be much more practical and larger banks in europe. this provision is easier to handle and 6,000 banks. but the point* take and by the european commission is at the end of the day the savings banks if you go ahead to do this provision
1:56 am
you may end up missing something. from one technical complexity you missing something in terms of what happens in the past with the smaller banks. >> thank you. i am randy handing. >> fred anticipated my question. if you could elaborate more on the structure you like to see for the superb vision went to the arrangements now discussed per santander would migrate from the big
1:57 am
as spain to the european central bank in the first instance. could you talk revenue feel about at and what should be the division of labor between the ecb and the national paint regulatory authorities and the european banking authorities. >> the position of sand and there is very clear. we're in favor of the movement. to have the terms of expected losses we are in favor but matters related to the safety of the system or
1:58 am
the rules of competition but we're date -- definitely in favor. that typical is the analysis could be handled by a the expectation specter when you deal with those elements related to risk a of compatibility and of the stress test i think their role is extremely important. you cannot have the central bank dealing with issues but there is the role to be played with the rules with
1:59 am
the banks of europe and the implications of the failure how this will lead defect the financial sector in europe. >> >> to zero or three times today you mentioned relating to this goal deficit six points three or not is the question whether this seven of point* three or higher? not just the government but the market. >> it would ba disappointment obviously.

Capital News Today
CSPAN October 9, 2012 11:00pm-2:00am EDT

News/Business. News.

TOPIC FREQUENCY Us 26, Washington 13, Texas 11, U.s. 9, America 8, United States 6, Germany 5, Obama 4, Romney 4, Euros 4, Asia 3, Charlie 3, Nevada 3, San Francisco 3, Smu 3, Israel 3, Virginia 3, Diane 2, The Union 2, Griswold 2
Network CSPAN
Duration 03:00:00
Scanned in San Francisco, CA, USA
Source Comcast Cable
Tuner Channel 91 (627 MHz)
Video Codec mpeg2video
Audio Cocec ac3
Pixel width 704
Pixel height 480
Sponsor Internet Archive
Audio/Visual sound, color

disc Borrow a DVD of this show
info Stream Only
Uploaded by
TV Archive
on 10/10/2012